Rob from rich,give to poor -> rob from poor,give to poor

Page 3 of 3 [ 46 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

xenon13
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,638

31 Oct 2010, 10:34 pm

Why is the Right afraid to address NAIRU? The Reserve Army of Labour deliberately created by governments for the sake of corporate profits by their corporate overlords. As long as there's NAIRU, it is totally immoral to use "benign neglect" on the unemployed.



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

31 Oct 2010, 11:45 pm

Macbeth wrote:
That's not a very charitable attitude for someone demanding charity of others.

I am having personal issues now with anger and severe depression. Using a parental tone to tell me off for my "attitude problem" isn't going to help. And no, I do not have any charitable feelings for selfish people who would wish to turn the clock back 80 years to a time when there was no government assistance for people who were unemployed or disabled. I hold nothing but contempt and a deep and painful hatred for such people. Sorry, my hatred is not my choice. I don't want it to consume me but the evil I see is just too tangible for my mind to handle in my present vulnerable state. I'm not going to be participating in the ppr forum any more for my own health. If a site administrator had the power to ban me from the ppr forum alone this would be something I'd request.

This is my last post here.



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 113,605
Location: the island of defective toy santas

01 Nov 2010, 12:56 am

marshall wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
That's not a very charitable attitude for someone demanding charity of others.

I am having personal issues now with anger and severe depression. Using a parental tone to tell me off for my "attitude problem" isn't going to help. And no, I do not have any charitable feelings for selfish people who would wish to turn the clock back 80 years to a time when there was no government assistance for people who were unemployed or disabled. I hold nothing but contempt and a deep and painful hatred for such people. Sorry, my hatred is not my choice. I don't want it to consume me but the evil I see is just too tangible for my mind to handle in my present vulnerable state. I'm not going to be participating in the ppr forum any more for my own health. If a site administrator had the power to ban me from the ppr forum alone this would be something I'd request.

This is my last post here.


i wish i could impart on you the peace that comes from a willingness to let go and let god, who made all kinds in this world, to expose us to lessons on how not to behave. the hateful people on this forum are teachers, so try not to hate them. they teach us how noxious hate can be. put informally, they serve a very important function, as a bad example.



xenon13
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,638

01 Nov 2010, 12:58 am

marshall - This reminds me of a recent column of the great Alexander Cockburn who was taught this by of all people an editor at Penthouse. He would ask his interns "How pure is your hatred?", and Cockburn said "It's pure" with pride. He related this to tell people not to have big hopes for Ed Milliband in Britain as Cockburn put that question to him when he was an intern at The Nation and Milliband became all defensive and didn't give him the affirmative answer he wanted.

In short, when it comes to injustice and what is wrong, hatred is not a bad thing. If we don't hate injustice, then it will never be reduced, ever.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

01 Nov 2010, 8:27 am

xenon13 wrote:
Actually, crime during the Depression was high.


Yes. Mostly in connection with prohibition. Most of the unemployed did not resort to crime and violence. They begged and relied on charity, for the most part.

ruveyn



number5
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jun 2009
Age: 45
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,691
Location: sunny philadelphia

01 Nov 2010, 9:15 am

marshall wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
That's not a very charitable attitude for someone demanding charity of others.

I am having personal issues now with anger and severe depression. Using a parental tone to tell me off for my "attitude problem" isn't going to help. And no, I do not have any charitable feelings for selfish people who would wish to turn the clock back 80 years to a time when there was no government assistance for people who were unemployed or disabled. I hold nothing but contempt and a deep and painful hatred for such people. Sorry, my hatred is not my choice. I don't want it to consume me but the evil I see is just too tangible for my mind to handle in my present vulnerable state. I'm not going to be participating in the ppr forum any more for my own health. If a site administrator had the power to ban me from the ppr forum alone this would be something I'd request.

This is my last post here.


I sincerely hope that you're able to get out of the funk soon. I have several family members who suffer from severe deprssion and I know how much they suffer. Just know that not everyone sucks. There's a lot of goodness going on, even as I type. There is a light at the end of the dark tunnel, even if you can't see it now. Feel better soon! (I hope this didn't come off as dismissive or anything, because that's not how I meant it.)



Macbeth
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2007
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,984
Location: UK Doncaster

01 Nov 2010, 1:00 pm

marshall wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
That's not a very charitable attitude for someone demanding charity of others.

I am having personal issues now with anger and severe depression. Using a parental tone to tell me off for my "attitude problem" isn't going to help. And no, I do not have any charitable feelings for selfish people who would wish to turn the clock back 80 years to a time when there was no government assistance for people who were unemployed or disabled. I hold nothing but contempt and a deep and painful hatred for such people. Sorry, my hatred is not my choice. I don't want it to consume me but the evil I see is just too tangible for my mind to handle in my present vulnerable state. I'm not going to be participating in the ppr forum any more for my own health. If a site administrator had the power to ban me from the ppr forum alone this would be something I'd request.

This is my last post here.


Maybe I phrased it wrong. How about "Don't demand charity because then it isn't charity any more." Be angered by misers and skinflints and the monumentally self-interested by all means, but there really is no point in demanding that they change their ways, because they won't.

Having "anger and severe depression" isn't an excuse to act like a knob either, especially on a forum liberally populated with people who have anger and depression problems ALL the time. Being rude and aggressive just makes people get rude and aggressive back, and that's not helpful when you're having anger issues.


_________________
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart,
that you can't take part" [Mario Savo, 1964]


iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

01 Nov 2010, 11:19 pm

leejosepho wrote:
(*Note: The problem of seeming to never have enough can easily grow right alongside anyone's balance sheet.)


Yeah, just like the problem of actually never having enough is just in appearance as well? But only if a person is white, because they are somehow born with financial advantages exclusive to having more likelihood of sunburn....



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

01 Nov 2010, 11:51 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
leejosepho wrote:
(*Note: The problem of seeming to never have enough can easily grow right alongside anyone's balance sheet.)


Yeah, just like the problem of actually never having enough is just in appearance as well? But only if a person is white, because they are somehow born with financial advantages exclusive to having more likelihood of sunburn....


It says in Perke Avot (The Sayings of the Sages): Who is rich? He who is satisfied with his portion.

ruveyn



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

01 Nov 2010, 11:58 pm

ruveyn wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
leejosepho wrote:
(*Note: The problem of seeming to never have enough can easily grow right alongside anyone's balance sheet.)


Yeah, just like the problem of actually never having enough is just in appearance as well? But only if a person is white, because they are somehow born with financial advantages exclusive to having more likelihood of sunburn....


It says in Perke Avot (The Sayings of the Sages): Who is rich? He who is satisfied with his portion.

ruveyn


Would Avot be the plural form of the word for father?



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

02 Nov 2010, 12:05 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
leejosepho wrote:
(*Note: The problem of seeming to never have enough can easily grow right alongside anyone's balance sheet.)


Yeah, just like the problem of actually never having enough is just in appearance as well? But only if a person is white, because they are somehow born with financial advantages exclusive to having more likelihood of sunburn....


It says in Perke Avot (The Sayings of the Sages): Who is rich? He who is satisfied with his portion.

ruveyn


Would Avot be the plural form of the word for father?


It would indeed. The literal translation of Perke Avot is Portions (of text) of the Fathers referring to the sayings of the Jewish Sages who lived around the time Hilllel, Akiba and Shammai. It is the sixth book of the Mishne Torah which is a written down version of the Oral Tradition. The Mishne is the root portion of the the Talmud which has further commentary on the Oral Tradition.

ruveyn

ruveyn



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

02 Nov 2010, 3:15 am

number5 wrote:
Sand wrote:
number5 wrote:
leejosepho wrote:
Sand wrote:
hyperlexian wrote:
leejosepho wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Do the poor become rich after the rich man's wealth is gone or is there just one more poor man in the bunch who's just really pissed?

After all his money was gone, maybe he would actually feel relieved over no longer having to try to hold on to it.

i remember reading a folk tale about a king that was not happy until he lost all of his riches and power. even the clothes on his back. naked, powerless and poor, he felt free.

what was my point? i forgot.


Obviously the point was that he lost his mind as well as his power.

Not necessarily. People with more money seem to have more money troubles* ... and several folks with far more than me have heartily agreed when I have said that to them.

(*Note: The problem of seeming to never have enough can easily grow right alongside anyone's balance sheet.)


Mo' money, mo' problems. A miserable SOB who comes upon a fortune is just a miserable SOB with more money. Truly happy rich people would be just as happy without the money. Each step up the financial ladder carries more weight.


The misery that comes with money is minuscule compared with the misery that comes without it. That's a myth promulgated by the rich to keep the poor from strangling them.


I disagree. When money becomes a #1 priority, then you are bound to be miserable. I've been in both situations both during childhood and during adulthood. I think when you're put in a situation where material possessions have to be given up, it forces you to look at what's really important. It promotes creativity and a simpler life based on the things that truly matter most, which happens to not be things at all, but people.


But rich people don't all worry about their money. The hire excellent managers to do that for them and meanwhile enjoy all that money can buy - which is quite a lot.



Macbeth
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2007
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,984
Location: UK Doncaster

02 Nov 2010, 8:13 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Robin Hood is an idealized character who, in his devotion to robbing the rich and giving to the poor, might as well have been a hero to Karl Marx. However, after enough iterations of robbing from the rich (of which I am not) and giving to the poor, would not the rich also be poor? Who then is left to be robbed after the riches of the rich have all been equally distributed? Does the rich man remain rich after his wealth is gone? Do the poor become rich after the rich man's wealth is gone or is there just one more poor man in the bunch who's just really pissed?


Your whole base theory is flawed because that's not how robbery works. Robin Hood didn't remove the machinery of state that allowed the rich to be rich. He merely removed the wealth generated, which would eventually be replaced by more wealth.

In a modern setting, nobody RICH who gets robbed stays poor. They merely generate more income, claim from insurance etc etc. The only people who get poorer from theft are the poor or the lower middle classes, who can often be considered "poor" by comparison to the rich.

The only way for a modern Robin Hood to make rich people poor would be to go round getting in on the employment ladder higher than them, and removing them, thus making them poor.


_________________
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart,
that you can't take part" [Mario Savo, 1964]


iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

02 Nov 2010, 6:10 pm

Macbeth wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Robin Hood is an idealized character who, in his devotion to robbing the rich and giving to the poor, might as well have been a hero to Karl Marx. However, after enough iterations of robbing from the rich (of which I am not) and giving to the poor, would not the rich also be poor? Who then is left to be robbed after the riches of the rich have all been equally distributed? Does the rich man remain rich after his wealth is gone? Do the poor become rich after the rich man's wealth is gone or is there just one more poor man in the bunch who's just really pissed?


Your whole base theory is flawed because that's not how robbery works. Robin Hood didn't remove the machinery of state that allowed the rich to be rich. He merely removed the wealth generated, which would eventually be replaced by more wealth.

In a modern setting, nobody RICH who gets robbed stays poor. They merely generate more income, claim from insurance etc etc. The only people who get poorer from theft are the poor or the lower middle classes, who can often be considered "poor" by comparison to the rich.

The only way for a modern Robin Hood to make rich people poor would be to go round getting in on the employment ladder higher than them, and removing them, thus making them poor.


Why not just gas board room meetings?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDn1PLzQvGo[/youtube]